Love under lockdown: How changes in time with partner impacted stress and relationship outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic

With the onset of COVID-19, governments around much of the world implemented strict social distancing and stay-at-home orders that profoundly affected the amount of time many couples were spending together. In the present research, we examined whether perceptions of a change in time spent with a partner were associated with stress, and whether stress levels in turn predicted relationship commitment and satisfaction, both in the short term (Time 1) and longer term (Time 2; i.e., after 10 months). Results indicated partial mediation, such that less (vs. more) time spent with the partner was associated with greater stress at Time 1, which in turn partly accounted for lower commitment and relationship satisfaction both at Time 1, and satisfaction at Time 2. Less (vs. more) time spent with partner at Time 1 also predicted a greater likelihood of relationship dissolution at Time 2, again partially mediated by stress. An increase in quality time spent together at Time 2 predicted stress and relationship outcomes over and above the change in time spent together more generally. This research has important implications for understanding the ongoing effects of the pandemic on romantic relationships. In addition, this study provides new evidence regarding how changes in time spent with a partner are associated with stress and subsequent relationship outcomes.

The following analyses examine whether the association between time with partner and stress at Time 1 was moderated by other variables, such as demographic variables or COVID conditions.

Moderation by Age, Gender, and Cohabitation During the Pandemic
We tested whether the association between time spent with partner and stress was moderated by age, gender, and cohabitation during the pandemic in three separate models (i.e., one for each moderator). For age, we grand-mean centered age before entering it into the model.
For gender, we effects coded gender (-1 = female; +1 = male) before entering it into the model.
For these analyses, we excluded 5 participants who indicated they identified as nonbinary. For cohabitation during the pandemic, we also effects-coded cohabitation status (1 = Yes; -1 = No) before entering it into the model. Age, b = -0.02, SE = 0.02, t(566) = -0.87, p = .383, r = .04, gender, b = 0.02, SE = 0.02, t(561) = 1.05, p = .293, r = .04, and cohabitation during the pandemic, b = 0.04, SE = 0.03, t(566) = 1.45, p = .148, r = .06, did not moderate the association between time with partner and stress. sample reported a response at or above the midpoint for COVID restrictions, suggesting that almost the entire sample was living in regions where restrictions were imposed. Moreover, 422 (74.04%) participants in our sample reported living in regions with many restrictions (i.e., indicated scores of 5 or 6 on our 0 to 6 scale).

Moderation of Time Together on Relationship Quality by Time with Friends and Family
We also examined whether the association between time spent with partner and relationship quality (i.e., satisfaction and commitment) at

Moderation by Attachment at Time 1 and Time 2
We had pre-registered hypotheses regarding attachment anxiety and avoidance as possible moderators of the impact of a change in time spent together on relationship outcomes.
In general, we expected that more avoidantly attached individuals would report more negative relationship outcomes when they experienced an increase in time spent together, and more anxiously attached individuals would report more positive relationship outcomes when they experienced an increase in time spent together. To test this possibility, we regressed each outcome (i.e., stress, commitment, and satisfaction at Time 1 and Time 2) on attachment anxiety (grand-mean centered), attachment avoidance (grand-mean centered), change in time with partner, the attachment anxiety by time with partner interaction, and the attachment avoidance by time with partner interaction.

Time 1
Commitment. We first examined whether participants' commitment ratings depended on attachment avoidance and the change in time spent with their partner during (vs. before) the COVID-19 pandemic. The main effect of attachment avoidance was significant, with more avoidance predicting lower commitment, b = -0.64, SE = 0.04, t(564) = -16.76, p < .001, r = .58.
In addition, there was a significant interaction between attachment avoidance and subjective time difference, controlling for both attachment anxiety and the attachment anxiety by subjective time difference interaction, b = 0.08, SE = .02, t(564) = 3.93, p < .001, r = .16. At low levels of attachment avoidance (-1 SD), change in time with partner did not predict commitment, b = -0.02, SE = 0.03, t(564) = -0.58, p = .563, r = .02. At high levels of attachment avoidance (+ 1 SD), more time with partner was associated with higher levels of commitment, b = 0.15, SE = 0.03, t(564) = 5.14, p < .001, r = .21. Neither the main effect of attachment anxiety nor the attachment anxiety by time spent with partner were significant, ts< 1.60, ps > .110.
Satisfaction. We next examined whether participants' satisfaction ratings depended on their levels of attachment avoidance or attachment anxiety and change in time spent with partner.
The main effect of attachment avoidance was significant, with more attachment avoidance In sum, we found no evidence for our preregistered hypotheses regarding the moderating impact of attachment style on the effect of a change in time spent together on relationship outcomes. That is, we found no evidence that avoidantly attached individuals would experience more negative relationship outcomes when spending more time with their partner, or that anxiously attached individuals would experience more positive relationship outcomes when spending more time with their partner.

Change in Time Spent Together (In Hours)
Participants indicated the average number of hours they spent with their partner each day before the pandemic began, and then the average number of hours they spent each day with their partner currently. This measure enabled us to assess the amount of time participants were spending daily with their partner during the pandemic, controlling for the amount of time they had spent with their partner daily before the pandemic started. We grand-mean centered both predictors. When testing for moderations, we also included the interaction term with amount of time participants were spending daily with their partner before the pandemic because we were interested in whether the change in time was moderated. Thus, the model we were interested in testing is as follows: This model expands to the following: We chose not to constrain b 3 and b 4 to be equal in our model as this is an unnecessary constraint to impose on our model.

Change in Time Spent Together (in hours)
A paired t-test using the number of hours participants estimated spending with their partner before and during the pandemic revealed that participants reported spending significantly more hours with their partner during the pandemic, t(569) = 4.53, p < .001, Cohen's d = 0.19 (see Table S1 for means).

Stress
The number of hours spent together during the pandemic was not associated with stress,

Commitment
The number of hours spent together during the pandemic was positively associated with commitment, controlling for hours spent together before the pandemic; that is, a relative increase in the number of hours spent with a partner was associated with greater commitment, b = 0.20,

Satisfaction
The number of hours spent together during the pandemic was positively associated with satisfaction, controlling for hours spent together before the pandemic; that is, a relative increase in the number of hours spent with the partner was associated with greater satisfaction, b = 0.15, SE = 0.07, t(567) = 2.09, p = .037, r = .09. This effect was not moderated by whether couples were cohabiting, whether they had children living in the home, participants' gender, the change in time spent during the pandemic with friends and family, their perceptions of the severity of COVID-19 in the region in which they were living, or the degree of COVID-19 restrictions in the region in which they live, ts < 1.93, ps > .055.

Curvilinear Analyses.
We also considered the possibility that a change in time spent together might have a curvilinear association with satisfaction. To test this possibility, we used the same model described above for stress. There was no significant curvilinear effect for time during the pandemic on satisfaction, b = 0.003, SE = 0.08, t(564) = 0.03, p = .972, r = .00.

Mediation Analyses
We next tested whether stress would mediate the effect of hours per day spent with partner during the pandemic on our outcome variables, controlling for hours per day spent with partner prior to the pandemic. The indirect effect of hours spent with partner on commitment, controlling for hours spent with partner prior to the pandemic, was not It is likely that the curvilinear association between time together during the pandemic and stress made it more difficult for us to detect an indirect effect.

Time 2 Analyses
As was the case at Time 1, participants reported spending more hours per day with their partner than they had before the pandemic (See Table S1). Indeed, a paired t-test using the number of hours participants estimated spending with their partner before and during the pandemic revealed that participants reported spending significantly more hours with their partner during the pandemic at Time 2 than before the pandemic, t(358) = 2.69, p = .007, Cohen's d = 0.14.

Satisfaction
The estimated number of hours spent together during the pandemic at Time 1, controlling for the Time 1 estimate of hours spent together before the pandemic, did not predict satisfaction at Time 2, b = 0.06, SE = 0.09, t(356) = 0.72, p = .473, r = .04.

Moderation by Stress (Alternative Model)
We also considered the possibility that some couples may be more vulnerable to the stress experienced during the pandemic. That is, individuals with lower satisfaction at Time 1 or lower commitment at Time 1 were more likely to experience declines in satisfaction or commitment at Time 2 if they also experienced high levels of stress. To test this, we conducted four moderation analyses. In these models, all predictors were grand-mean centered. In the first

Moderation by Time Together (Alternative Model)
We also considered another model in which couples who were unhappy prior to the pandemic and who were forced to spend time together due to the pandemic may experience higher levels of stress. We tested this possibility in two separate models. In the first model, we regressed T1 stress on T1 satisfaction, T1 time together, and their interaction. There was no significant interaction in this model, b = 0.01, SE = 0.01, t(566) = 0.72, p = .470, r = .03. In the second model, we regressed T1 stress on T1 commitment, T1 time together, and their interaction.
Given that our sample consisted of primarily securely attached individuals, it is possible that there were not enough individuals who were unhappy with their relationship in our sample to detect this effect if it did exist.

Moderation of Time Together by Stress (Alternative Model)
We also considered the possibility that the association between time together and relationship outcomes (i.e., satisfaction and commitment at Time 1